Collateral ratings - Lily's Star- A shoe-in 4.10 curragh

Because of the sheer volume of racing now I suspect many of these ratings are arrived at by computer algorithms, with maybe some manual tweaking. I don't know about RPRs but I've seen many discrepancies with Topspeed ratings. For instance, I have Dank top rated today, 2lbs clear of Fiesolana, whereas Topspeed has her 8lbs behind. While I expect differences, 10lbs is a big amount. I think that's why time ratings often get a bum rap, on many occasions the methodology used is plain wrong.

Almost certainly a computerised rating which no-one looked at or if they did probably just said that the rest fit, that's an abberation. It's the old old problem of conditions race form in handicaps not being reliable. Fundamentally, it's a problem in the methodology of using race standardisation to set a level plus mostly building the ratings around the 3/4 horses in 10 runner fields maybe 5/6 in larger fields. All the statistical devices in the world can be wrong when dealing with small samples such as a race field size. No-one likes to say that the winner probably ran 20lb below form but still won.